Since I posted in your other thread saying that the Challengers are my favorite shoes ever, I'll respond. No shoe will satisfy everyone, and it is obviously the case here. We all had different running gaits, foot shapes, preferences, and so on that affect shoe choice, so no big deal... just find or keep using shoes that you like.
I have 980 miles in my Challengers, so I'll provide some feedback from the perspective of someone who loves them and is in the end-of-life phase of the shoe.
I agree with your first point. For the next update, they should use an upper material with a much greater cycle life. That said, the life of the upper has been about typical compared to my other shoes. I might wear through uppers faster than most runners because I have wider than average feet that put more stress on them. The holes are now 2" long on the medial forefoot flex areas. The first holes to penetrate all the way through such that you could see my socks through them appeared about 300-400 miles in, and they have gradually grown larger. My original Nike Wildhorses were worse, with the out layer of the uppers blowing up before 100 miles. Same with 2 pairs of Altra superiors. I had 2"-3" tears in my Adidas Rockets by 200 miles.
I actually love the tongue on the Challenger. It has never moved while running, I don't feel any lace pressure at all, and it shows no wear nearing 1,000 miles. The thinness means that they dry really fast and contribute to the light weight of the shoe.
I only noticed the Meta-Rocker while standing on the first day. I love the geometry because it obviously is a part in determining the the feel/ride of the shoe, and I think it's great. I see the undercut heel as the difference between the Challengers and something like my old Puma Trailfox 4s that I used to like, but no longer do due to a feeling of having a clunky heel that gets in the way - the wedge that, with my generally flat midfooted landings causes the heel to catch first.
The wear on the outsole is outstanding for me. The rubber lugs were 4 mm to start. At 980 miles, they are still 3 mm high at the smaller V-lugs in the central forefoot, and near 4 mm elsewhere. The exposed midsole portions don't and never contributed to traction except maybe on soft snow, soft sand, and moist-not-wet mud where the ground material is able to fill the cavities. There is no appreciable midsole material/cushion lost to abrasion in my pair. I don't scuff my feet all during running though. Someone like my GF, who scuffs with every stride, could probably go through the heel and be grinding away the midsoles fairly quickly - but no probably no more than any other shoe with hard rubber in the heel.
The Challengers may feel clunky to you, but they don't to me. I have only had one other pair of Hokas, the Stinson Trails, and I would agree that they feel clunky.
Pricewise, I got mine at REI (where they were an exclusive for 2-3 months), so I will get 15% back for my full price pair (10% dividend+5% paying for it with an REI credit card), making it $110.50 after I get the dividend back next year. I'll get my next pair with the current 20% member coupon, making it $104 at the payment counter. I'll get 5% more back next year in my REI divident by using my REI credit card, bring the cost down to under $100. I obviously don't think it's inferior to the Adidas, Nikes, Sauconys, etc that I have had, since they are my favorite shoes.
I don't see or feel anything wrong with the insoles. I use the flatter of the 2 pair supplied with the shoes. Not sure what you are going on about with that. Different experiences are probably due to different feet.